part0061

Most Christians either believe that the Bible is the literal Word of God or at least that the Bible was inspired by God. Given this, the Bible, as believed by many, cannot contain any errors (inerrant), even though the creation, duplication, and interpretation of the Bible is a very human process that occurred over thousands of years. But what if the Bible did contain factual errors or contradictions? Some believe that this would prove that the Bible couldn’t be the perfect Word of God. The concern is, if you cannot believe all of the Bible, how can you believe any of it?

For the sake of this discussion, a contradiction can be defined as a statement or a proposition that contradicts or denies another or itself and is logically incongruous . So for example, “Kim is married to me, but I am not married to Kim” is a contradiction, because it cannot logically be true. But what if I were to say that statement was meant to be more allegorical in nature, and what I really meant was that I am not fully committed to my marriage? Then it would make perfect sense, and no longer be a contradiction. Technically, the statement itself is still a contradiction; it’s the interpretation and/or implied meaning that suggests otherwise. I am very committed to my relationship with my lovely wife, Kim (legal disclaimer).

What appears to be contradictions can also be explained in many other ways as well. Here is how most of the alleged Biblical contradictions have been explained:

Combination. Something can be more than one thing at one time. For example, my kids are both Irish and Swedish.

Time is ignored. A person can be both a child and an adult — at different times in his or her life .

Translation issues. Words can be translated in many different ways, especially from dead languages used 3,500 years ago. Biblical literalists suggest that if the accepted translation causes a contradiction, then there must be another way to translate it.

Vague language. “Brother” can mean biological brother, step-brother, or homie (yo, wassup brother?). If you are Catholic, Jesus had homies. Otherwise, he had biological brothers.

God is a logical contradiction. Since God is not bound by logic and is outside the laws of the universe, anything goes. God can be all things at one time, he can be everywhere and nowhere, he can be seen and not heard or heard and not seen, neither or both. You can’t put worldly limits on God, therefore the Bible can get away with quite a bit.

Subjective words. Is God’s anger is fierce and endures long (Num 32:13 / Num 25:4 / Jer 17:4) or is God’s anger slow and endures but for a moment (Ps 103:8 / Ps 30:5)? It depends on how you define “moment.” Or as Bill Clinton put it, “It depends on how you define ‘is’.”

Not the full story. It is very easy to pull a few words from the Bible and completely change the intended meaning. If you do not know the Bible that well, you can easily be manipulated by quotes taken out of context.

Specific for an audience. Jesus tells a man in Matthew 19 that he needs to “sell everything” in order to have treasures in Heaven. It would be a real bummer if we all needed to do this for salvation, so it’s not a requirement for everyone, just to random men that Jesus tests.

Science is just plain wrong. So far we have seen explanations for the Bible contradicting itself and even the Bible contradicting logic. But what if the Bible contradicts generally accepted scientific theories? If the Bible cannot be wrong, then science must be wrong. Saddles on dinosaurs — deal with it.

As we know, the Bible did not fall from Heaven. It is a book that comprises 66 other books. Do you think that whoever established the canon we have today would have chosen books with blatant contradictions with the other books? Don’t you think that this just might have been an important factor in the canonization decision process? I tend to agree that many of these apparent contradictions are due to the lack of understanding of the original and intended meaning — at least how it was understood at the time these books were accepted as part of the Holy Bible.

It is important to keep in mind that many of these alleged contradictions weren’t a problem for ancient Judaism or early Christianity. Many of these “problems” are due to the evolution of theology over the last 2,000 years and our ideas about God that have become more cultural than Biblical. This is where the Bible certainly does appear to be problematic. For example, the idea that Jesus is God, or the doctrine of the Trinity.

I am tempted to list more examples that I see as real problems — more problematic for classical Christian theology than the Bible itself, but I am sure they can easily be justified by anyone determined to defend his or her faith. If you were to research Bible contradictions, you would find many sources listing several hundred. Ignore these sources. Instead, search for “Bible contradictions explained” or “Bible contradictions answered” and read the explanations and justifications given. Use your own mind to see if they make sense; not because you want them to, but because they actually do.

Those who insist on an error-free Bible are concerned that if one cannot believe the entire Bible, then one cannot believe in any of it. If I shared their views, I would be much more concerned with the practice of explaining away contradictions and different theologies through implied allegory, translation issues, vague and subjective use of language, and other linguistic acrobatics. Such an unclear, subjective, and non-literal book hardly seems like the work of a perfect God.

A contradiction is only a true contradiction if it cannot be explained, and the given explanation is accepted as valid. This is why some believe the Bible has over 600 contradictions and others believe it has none. If you honestly evaluate these apparent contradictions and conclude that some are actual contradictions because the explanations seem clearly contrived, you don’t need to abandon your faith; but you do need to reconsider in what or whom you should be placing your faith.